 |
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |
ILCCR: Examination of individual case concerning Convention No. 100, Equal Remuneration, 1951 Japan (ratification: 1967) Published: 2007Description:(ILCCR Individual Observation) Convention:C100 Country:(Japan) Session of the Conference:96 Document:22 Subject classification: Equal Remuneration Subject classification: Women Subject: Equality of Opportunity and Treatment Display the document in: French Spanish Document No. (ilolex): 132007JPN100 A Government representative said that her Government had been making various efforts to diminish the unreasonable wage gap between men and women, such as enforcing the relevant legislation, including section 4 of the Labour Standards Law prohibiting gender discrimination in remuneration, and the Equal Employment Opportunities Law prohibiting gender discrimination in all phases of employment management. This legislation had a major impact on the determination of wages, in areas such as recruitment, hiring, job assignment, promotion and training, etc. As a result, the wage disparity had declined steadily, but there still remained a gender gap. The main factors behind the remaining gap were the uneven distribution of men and women workers in managerial positions and the difference in the average length of service between men and women. Recognizing the great importance of better employment management, her Government had been encouraging employers' and workers' organizations to clarify the actual situation of wage disparity between male and female workers in each company, to discuss measures to address it and to develop fair and transparent systems including clearer criteria for wage determination and appraisal systems for individuals. She indicated that one of the measures taken for this purpose since 2003 was the preparation of "Guidelines on the Improvement Measures of Wage and Employment Management for Eliminating Wage Disparity between Men and Women", which had been widely distributed to employers' and workers' organizations. In addition, the Equal Employment Opportunities Law, revised in 2006, had strengthened the ban on gender discrimination in the allocation of duties and responsibilities. She indicated her Government's willingness to endeavour to make further progress by continuing to implement these measures. Concerning part-time workers, the Diet in its current session had passed a Bill to revise the Part-Time Work Law with a view to correcting unreasonable disparate treatment of part-time workers. Her Government believed that the revised Law would eventually contribute to diminishing the wage gap between men and women, as the majority of part-time workers were women. In conclusion, she requested the Committee to understand that reducing the wage gap required reviewing the country's long-standing employment management systems and practices, which were themselves products of negotiation between workers and management. Based on careful observation of the changes in such systems and practices in the context of the globalization of the economy as well as the declining birth rate, her Government would continue, with the understanding and cooperation of employers and workers, to promote yet more actively measures to improve employment management so that the wage disparity between men and women would be diminished. She added that in its annual report, her Government would provide replies to the comments of the Committee of Experts, including the latest statistical data, and would continue to inform the ILO of the progress in the situation. The Employer members emphasized the need to focus on the issue addressed by the Convention, namely equal pay for work of equal value, and not to expand the debate into other, albeit, important matters of gender management and discrimination. They noted with appreciation the acknowledgement by the Government that there was a problem and its commitment to working continually towards the eventual eradication of wage discrimination. The Employer members recalled that article 4 of the Labour Standards Law prohibited gender discrimination in remuneration and that the revised Equal Employment Opportunities Law, which came into force in April 2007, explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sex in the assignment of tasks and responsibilities, as well as in any other changes concerning the occupation or employment contract of a worker. The Government had also produced guidelines in 2003 on measures to improve wage and employment management with a view to eliminating wage disparity between men and women. They further noted with interest a Bill to revise the Part-time Work Law. All of these measures amounted to a clear indication that the Government was addressing this important matter. The Employer members concluded that the laws in place were adequate to address the issue and that the crux of the matter lay in implementation and monitoring, which were the main focus of the comments by the Committee of Experts. With regard to data, the Employer members emphasized the importance of avoiding incorrect assumptions based on the data provided. While the figures contained in the report of the Committee of Experts were a matter for concern, they could not solely be attributed to non-compliance with the principle of equal pay for work of equal value, which was set out in the current legislation. The situation arose from problems of application and, in particular, from the type of situation that existed in many countries in which women's jobs were focused in certain industries or at certain levels. In addition, many women worked in temporary employment and there were fewer women than men in management. Turning to the issue of career tracking, the Employer members noted that it was often an effective tool for fast tracking of skilled persons. Nevertheless, it was important to ensure that women were appropriately represented in the process, and this was definitely an area that could be improved upon. In addition, the principle of allowing long service to play a key role in determining pay could create problems, particularly as many women took career breaks for personal reasons and then re-entered the job market some years later. In this respect, they noted that many employers were restructuring wages so that the long service aspect played less of a role in pay levels, with greater emphasis being given to the value of the job and the related deliverables. They therefore concluded that the Government acknowledged the existence of the problem, was prepared to rectify the situation and was taking steps to do so. The legislation was in place and the recent amendments had tightened the manner in which discrimination was addressed. Other means had been introduced to assist in the advisory and education process and there were specific projects addressing the structure of pay. The Government should therefore be encouraged to continue along the path that it had mapped out and should be requested to provide further information, including reporting data that allowed for a more accurate assessment of the situation. The Worker members emphasized that Japan was not known as a country of inequalities. The pay gap between men and women was therefore surprising. The observation of the Committee of Experts showed that the overall pay gap between men and women full-time workers had hardly changed since the beginning of the century, passing from 34.5 per cent in 2000 to 34.3 per cent in 2004. Furthermore, the pay gap had grown between part-time workers, with the pay of women being lower than that of men. Moreover, the pay gap was wider than in other industrialized countries. Japan had made efforts to correct these inequalities. In 2006, the national legislation had been amended to prohibit, as from April 2007, any discrimination based on gender in relation to the assignment of tasks and responsibilities. Nevertheless, it could already be foreseen that the new law would not bring about a firm solution, as it did not integrate the essential principle of Convention No. 100, namely equal remuneration for work of equal value based on an objective and a non-discriminatory evaluation of the various tasks to be carried out. In recent years, the persistence of the pay gap between men and women had demonstrated that the situation was the result of a systematic under-evaluation of tasks undertaken principally or exclusively by women. The revision of the legislation in 2006 related to indirect discrimination. However, the revision was limited as it allowed the competent ministry to examine only a limited number of situations that could be described as indirect discrimination, instead of setting out a general definition of indirect discrimination which could be applied in many situations. The Government had also issued voluntary directives aimed at encouraging workers and employers to revise their management systems for wages and employment. However, there was very little information available on the impact of these directives. What could be seen was that the use of career tracking systems led to a very weak participation of women in managerial positions. The Committee of Experts had further observed that, of the 122,793 inspections carried out in 2004, only eight violations of the legislation on equal remuneration had been found. None of them had been considered serious enough to be referred to the Prosecutor's Office, which did not appear very credible. The Government needed to make greater efforts to reduce the pay gap between men and women in an effort to avoid being among the worst industrialized countries in the field of equal remuneration. To do so, it would have to: bring its legislation into conformity with the provisions of Convention No. 100 and establish the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value; introduce a new general definition of indirect discrimination; strengthen its action at the enterprise level for the revision of wages and employment management systems; and reinforce the labour inspection system. The Worker member of Japan said that the ILO had been drawing the Government's attention to the issues of the wage system, career track management and indirect discrimination. The main factors in the gender wage gap lay in the use of career tracking systems, job allocation and posting, and the relatively low wage level for atypical workers, including part-time workers, who were predominantly women. The Government representative had indicated that the Equal Employment Opportunities Law, revised in 2006, was expected to improve the situation in relation to job allocation and posting. However, she said that she did not agree with the Government representative that length of service was one of the major factors in the wage gap, as the length of service of Japanese workers was now similar to that of workers in other developed countries. She also challenged the statement by the Government representative that the overall situation in relation to the wage gap had been steadily improving, because the pace of the change was too slow. She indicated that under the Japanese wage system, a wage was determined through personal elements and job elements, and wages were not therefore directly related to the classification of the job. Article 4 of the Labour Standards Law, which prohibited wage discrimination based on gender, did not literally stipulate the principle of "equal pay for work of equal value", even though it was the legal basis for ratifying the Convention. However, even within this context, the introduction, implementation and expansion of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value were possible and necessary. There had already been a verdict applying the job evaluation method. It was therefore necessary for the Government to promote the application of job evaluation methodologies. The trade unions would concentrate their efforts on establishing a wage system based on job classification that was applicable across enterprises. She said that the career track management was used as a de facto gender-based employment management system as it allowed employers to classify workers in different career paths, such as major career track and minor career track. The revised Equal Employment Opportunities Law allowed in its implementing guidelines "distinctions based on employment management" and prohibited gender discrimination only within the same career category. This was not in line with the principle of "work of equal value". The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare had recognized the problems arising from the career tracking system and had issued an official notice indicating in detail the points to be taken into account in order to avoid gender-based employment management. Although certain progress could be seen, the situation was continuing without significant improvement. The revision of the Equal Employment Opportunities Law in 2006, ten years after the previous revision, focused principally on prohibiting indirect discrimination. Only three criteria were defined in a ministerial ordinance, which could constitute discrimination if the employer could not provide justification for them. They were as follows: (1) the requirement of a certain height, weight and physical strength on recruitment and hiring; (2) the requirement of nationwide transfer upon recruitment and promotion of workers in the major career track; and (3) the requirement of transfer for promotion. The Japanese trade unions had called for a general prohibition of indirect discrimination, but their claim had not been accepted. Verification was needed as to whether these restrictive provisions were in conformity with the legislation requested by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Another issue relating to indirect discrimination was whether or not discrimination against part-time workers should have been regarded as indirect discrimination. The Government viewed it as discrimination by type of employment, rather than indirect discrimination, while the trade unions considered it to be gender discrimination. In May 2007, the Part-Time Law had been revised to prohibit discriminatory treatment of part-time workers whose duties and responsibilities were considered the same as those of regular workers. But the number of part-time workers covered by such protection was only 1 to 5 per cent. The Law therefore needed to be revised to prohibit discriminatory treatment for all part-time workers. She added that the Advisory Council for Regulatory Reform set up by the Government had recently produced a position document on labour calling for drastic changes in the labour legislation with a view to reducing worker protection and increasing the use of atypical forms of employment. With regard to pay equity, the Advisory Council had come out against the implementation of the principle of equal pay for equal work and had suggested that the State should establish conditions for increased mobility of employment. Her trade union confederation, RENGO, strongly objected to this position document and even the Minister of Labour and Welfare had indicated that its conclusions were not in conformity with current government policy. The position document had therefore been removed from the Council's final conclusions, but it was necessary to remain vigilant and raise the alarm whenever necessary. The Employer member of Japan indicated that the statistics contained in the report of the Committee of Experts were based on an average of the monthly pay of a large sample of the population and on different kinds of pay systems. One of these was pay based on the job or the work performed, while the other consisted of pay based on the person, reflecting length of service and other factors. Over the years, the relative share of the two components had changed. In very general terms, around 70 per cent of average pay had been based on the pay system geared to the person, with 30 per cent being geared to the work done. In recent years, according to a study carried out by the Japan Productivity Centre, the trend had been reversed, with an average of 30 per cent being based on the person and 70 per cent on the work performed. He added that in May this year the employers' federation had prepared a proposal for the restructuring of the pay system in the light of the need for companies to be competitive and in view of changing social and economic circumstances. This placed emphasis on shifting towards a pay system that created a better environment in which employees could meet the challenge of the future, which would be based on the principles of equity, objectivity, visibility and gender equality in pay systems. The Worker member of Pakistan recalled the fundamental importance of Convention No. 100 and called on the Government of Japan to bring its law and practice into conformity with the Convention. Japan was one of the major world powers and needed to recognize the need to comply with its international commitments, as outlined by the Committee of Experts. Although the Government had recently amended the legislation, it needed to take measures to prevent indirect discrimination and should engage in consultation with the social partners. In particular, measures were needed to prevent abuse through the career tracking system and to establish effective inspection machinery. The main concern was that the gender wage gap had been reduced very little over the past 20 years, as indicated in the report of the Committee of Experts. Although the Government claimed to be monitoring the situation, it was of great importance to ensure a congenial working environment for women, especially those engaged in part-time and temporary work and in the informal economy. Moreover, it was a matter of concern that so few violations had been identified by the labour inspection system, despite the high number of inspections carried out. It was therefore essential to ensure that inspections were targeted at work typically performed by women, carried out in a transparent manner and undertaken in collaboration with workers' organizations in the enterprise. There was also a need to share examples of good practice. He hoped that the Government would take the measures recommended by the Committee of Experts in cooperation with the social partners with a view to giving full effect to this very important Convention. The Worker member of Singapore recalled that the Convention was intended to address a significant imbalance that existed in society today, namely the serious and grossly unfair undervaluing of women's work compared to men simply because of their gender. There was no research or evidence to show that women were less productive or less capable than men, but they continued to receive less pay for work of the same value and to suffer significant barriers to their career advancement. There was no doubt that Japan would never be where it was today without the contribution of its women. Yet they continued to suffer discrimination and pay inequality. If women continued to earn significantly less, it was not because of their shorter service, as the Government representative had maintained. The gap in length of service between men and women had narrowed as more women opted to stay in the labour market after marriage or childbirth. So there were clearly other factors at work. It was therefore necessary to look closely at the legislation, practices, structures and systems, which were often so institutionalized and deep-rooted that a great deal of effort was required to eradicate them. She added that the case of indirect discrimination was an example of an issue on which the legislation had been amended, but where the problem persisted. Employers were still allowed to impose certain criteria when employing workers, even though it was clear that women would face greater difficulty than men in meeting those criteria. The Government therefore needed to make it clear that any form of discrimination, whether explicit or implicit, was unacceptable and should be clearly prohibited by the legislation. Another practice that appeared to offer a way of circumventing the law was the career tracking system. Although on the surface it seemed to be simply a management tool to select better performers, it could become a tool of suppression as women stood little chance of entering it, as admitted by the Government in its report to the Committee of Experts. Indeed, a Government survey in 2003 had shown that the overall number of women on the main track system was 3.5 per cent. She therefore urged the Government to work closely with the social partners to address the issues raised, end discrimination against women and comply with its obligations under the Convention. She added that it was also in the interests of employers to ensure that there was a fair and transparent system. If they deprived themselves of the best people for the job, they would be at a competitive disadvantage in today's battle for talent. The Worker member of India noted that, although the Government claimed that the disparity in gender pay had been reduced over the past 18 years, it recognized that the remaining gap was still wide when compared with other countries. Although the legislation on equal remuneration had been revised, the revision had failed to address pay discrimination because it had not prohibited direct and indirect discrimination in procedures for the determination of wages. He expressed full agreement with the observation by the Committee of Experts that the application of the principle of equal remuneration required consideration to be given to the remuneration received by men and women performing jobs of equal value. It was likely that the persistent disparity had occurred due to discrimination which resulted in work performed predominantly or exclusively by women being undervalued. It was also a cause for alarm that, despite the large number of inspections carried out, only eight cases of violations had been identified, none of which were sufficiently serious to be referred to the Prosecutor's Office. It was now a global phenomenon that employers in all countries were endeavouring to exact more work for lower wages from all workers in general, and from women and children in particular. Although it was a highly developed and industrialized country, Japan was no exception. Women were doubly exploited at home and in the workplace. This practice would continue until society accorded the dignity and honour to women that they so fully deserved. The Worker member of the United Kingdom said that although Japan and her own country were oceans apart, they shared many things, including the failure to implement Convention No. 100. She emphasized that unequal pay reflected on the value that society placed on women's work, women's roles and women's position in society. Although Convention No. 100 was among the most widely ratified ILO Conventions, she wondered how many countries actually gave their women, both full-time and part-time workers, equal pay for work of equal value. She added that when reference was made to women breaking their service, what was really meant was having babies. What was needed was the coherent and transparent implementation of effective job evaluation with full protection under the law to ensure that all women workers had access to equal pay, including the protection from direct and indirect discrimination of vulnerable workers and those in atypical employment relationships. She concluded that Convention No. 100 needed to be implemented to its fullest meaning; all forms of discrimination, including indirect discrimination, had to be eliminated; and social dialogue should be promoted with a view to speeding up the process of achieving equal remuneration for all the workers affected. In the words of a famous Scottish poet, we are blessed only if we have the gift of seeing ourselves as others see us. She therefore called on everyone to examine themselves before judging others. The Government representative noted the points raised by the members of the Committee. Her Government considered that diminishing the wage disparity between men and women was an important issue, and would therefore continue to take the most effective measures to address it and to obtain the understanding and cooperation of employers and workers in this respect. Regarding some of the matters brought up during the discussion, her Government would take them into consideration in conducting further studies on measures to be taken in the future and would keep the ILO informed of any relevant developments. The Employer members emphasized that they fully recognized the value that women brought to the workplace and their overall and invaluable role in society. They also fully endorsed Convention No. 100. However, they believed that it was necessary to examine the situation before the Committee on its merits. There was common agreement that there was a wage gap problem that needed to be addressed. However, it was necessary to recognize that the Government was active in adapting its legislation, that an advisory body was in operation and that guidelines had been disseminated. All of these measures were to be welcomed. What still required attention was the implementation of the legislation, monitoring and reporting. The Worker members urged the Government to reduce the wage disparity between men and women as soon as possible. Between 1986 and 2004, a period of almost 20 years, the disparity had been reduced by only by 8 per cent and, since 2000, this reduction had clearly come to a stop. The Government needed to take multidimensional measures, to reduce the gap. They called on the Government to create an environment conducive to diminishing wage disparity by taking measures to encourage the social partners to review the system of employment management and promotion in enterprises. In addition, in order to demonstrate its conviction and determination to diminish the wage gap between men and women, the Government should establish a precise time frame within which to achieve this objective, and include this in its general economic targets.
ConclusionsThe Committee took note of the statement made by the Government representative, as well as the discussion that took place thereafter. The Committee noted that the Committee of Experts had been commenting for a number of years on the persistent and wide gender pay gap, the legislative framework, and pay discrimination arising out of wage and employment management systems. The Committee noted the detailed information presented by the Government concerning the laws and regulations, guidelines and policies in place to address discrimination against women, including with respect to wages. The Committee noted in particular that the Equal Employment Opportunities Law had recently been amended to prohibit discrimination based on sex with respect to assignment of tasks and responsibilities. Noting the persistence of the wide gender pay gap, the Committee welcomed the Government's commitment to take effective measures to address this issue, and acknowledged that steps had been taken to address gender discrimination, including regarding wages. The Committee urged the Government to promote more actively equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value in law and in practice, to strengthen the implementation and monitoring of the existing legislation and measures, and to assess the impact on indirect discrimination and equal pay for work of equal value. It also requested the Government to further examine the impact of wage and employment management systems, including career tracking systems, on the earnings of women, with a view to addressing wage discrimination. The Committee urged the Government to create an environment conducive to eliminating the gender pay gap, including through providing incentives, guidance, and improving enforcement in this area, as well as stepping up its efforts to promote objective job evaluation methods. The Committee called for further tripartite consultation on all these matters. The Committee requested the Government to reply to all the comments of the Committee of Experts as well as all the requests made by this Committee in its report due this year under article 22 of the ILO Constitution. |
| ILO Home | NORMES home | ILOLEX home | Universal Query | NATLEX |
|
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |